Realistic or not, its important

The following is a response from the article “Teenage boredom can lead to drinking, drug use” by Marcela Palefsky.The article starts by describing a scenario of a common teenage party that leads to drinking in Montrose. The article then continues to explain that while during the daylight hours teenagers have activities available to them, it is when night falls that teenager boredom hits, which leads to foolish choices. More surprisingly, even when communities have created ample “hang-out” areas for teens to enjoy themselves, these centers seldom last due to either lack of interest or little support from the community. According to Kristine Bagnara, program director of the Drinking and Drug Task Force in Montrose, in order to avoid more cases with teenage drinking and drug abuse, a center must have solid leadership, as well as support from both the teenage and adult community.

Nearly every teenager in every state has likely gotten into some sort of trouble that began with being bored. I would know, I’ve done it too, though not to the extent of these teens in Montrose. Sure these types of situations make great stories in later years, but they are ,nevertheless, foolish situations to get into to begin with, especially from something as simple as boredom. Ranting aside, I thought this article set a very clear example as to what can happen when dullness creeps upon the teenage mind, and it was written in a way that teenagers as well as adults can both read and find points that they can read and nod their heads to. I also agreed with the idea that there should be more teenage centers available in order to discourage questionable behavior and encourage smarter choices, so long that the centers are well supported by teens and adults alike. I certainly wish there were more here in Pennsylvania. It is a nice place, but in some areas there is little to do during the evening hours, at least not things that could easily cause problems. Getting the future generations away from foolish thinking caused by boredom is more important than most tend to believe, because after all, the teenagers of today will at some point be the adults of tomorrow, and I would think that the adults of today would want the adults of tomorrow to make good decisions.

The following is a response to the article “Solar Homes Offer New Hope for Renewable Energy” by Amanda Wilson, which originally appeared in the Global Information Network. The article begins by telling about the Solar Decathlon, which is a competition held in Washington that challenges college students to construct affordable houses that are energy efficient, architecturally pleasing, and by solar-powered; the houses are later presented to the public and voted on. Amanda then states how the solar industry is widely ignored upon by the government due to a failure of Solyndra, a solar cell manufacturer in California, and that although the solar industry has been growing at a much faster rate than fossil fuel industries, the government continues to only put one-twelfth of what it subsidizes in the fossil fuel industry into renewable energy industries.

With this article, I felt there was good, and bad news. The good news is that the younger generation is taking a great initiative towards creating homes (affordable homes might I add) that run on renewable energy; however, the bad news is that the government does not subsidize the renewable energy industry nearly as much as it should be. The solar industry does not receive nearly as much credit as a successful energy source as it should. I for one would love to be able to see these houses at some point in my life, and perhaps live in one in the later future, granted that the houses are put up for sale after the competition. I know there are those who believe that solar energy is unaffordable, but I like to think that this article is a good example of evidence that states that it is not; rather it is fossil fuels that are becoming increasingly unaffordable. Personal thoughts aside, the article was very descriptive about the construction and overall appearance of the solar homes, as well as the thoughts of the students who made them.

The following is a response to the article “Ban Fracking Now” by Josh Fox, which originally appeared in USA TODAY. Josh starts his article by telling of how he had witnessed a job site that was drilling for natural gas, and how the procedure was affecting the people who lived near the area in a negative way. He continues to state how the act of drilling for natural gas or “fracking” has terrible consequences on the environment, due to the toxic chemicals that are used in the procedure, and the amount of water and air pollution it causes afterwords.

At first I thought natural gas was a better alternative to using coal, but that was before I read all the evidence that proves otherwise. This persuasive article is just another example of how our shameless drilling for resources disrupts people’s lives in the worst of ways. I strongly agree with the author’s opinion that there should be a ban on drilling for natural gas, before it becomes too popular. If fracking is polluting the air we breathe, then this information applies to everyone in the world. It’s a shame that of all the forms of alternative energy there are in the world, this is the one we turn to to reduce our dependence on oil. I know I don’t want the air I breathe and the water I drink to be contaminated with pollutants, just so the government can save a few dollars. The article was written in a persuasive way that was supported by scientific facts and information, and I thought his argument to be very convincing. To those who believe that drilling for natural gas is a good idea, I encourage you to read this, with hopes of creating awareness of the dangers of fracking, and changing that opinion.

The following is a response to the article “Tourism is Poisoning the Mexican Caribbean” by Stephen Leahy, which originally appeared in the Global Information Network.Leahy’s article starts byexplaining that the massive amount of tourism in Mexico’s Caribbean coast is causing excessive contamination to the groundwater ,and detrimental damage to the beautiful coral reefs that many tourists go to see. The primary causes of the pollution are pit latrines, septic tanks, leaking sewer lines, and golf courses, according Chris Metcalf, a researcher with the United Nations University’s Institute for Water, Environment, and Health. He continues to state how the problem is difficult to solve because of the amount of money tourists bring to the area, so environmental violations are overlooked in favor of more development.

Despite best efforts to prevent problems like this, there always seems to be some sort of issue like this going on somewhere in the world. It saddens me to know that in some places the environment is struggling, begging for help, but is quickly shot down for financial benefits, that is how this article is written out to me. I would think that the ocean would be the last area people would ignore pollution from, accounting that the ocean covers at least 70 percent of the earth overall. This article applies to just about every ocean loving vacationer out there, especially to tourists that go to the Caribbean and are not thinking about the consequences of their actions. Everyone enjoys a good trip to the tropics, I can respect that, and to most people, worrying about the environment while on vacation is likely the last thing on their minds. However it has reached a point, in this day and age, where sitting on a beach and doing nothing while coral reefs are shamelessly destroyed should seldom be an option. With all that said, this article was fairly informative and clearly written, and I would encourage vacationers to at least consider the fellow inhabitants of the beaches, those which cannot speak for themselves (coral and fish).

The following is a summery of Thomas L. Friedman’s book Hot, Flat, and Crowded, which originally was published on November 24, 2009. This was actually an updated version of the same book which was written in 2008. Hot, Flat, and Crowded only, at a glance, looks to be mainly a book about America’s need to go green and how it can be achieved. Further reading proves otherwise. Friedman’s book takes an depth look at all of the world’s main issues, such as global climatic disruption, the war on terrorism, and the country’s weak economy, and provides solutions that can help save both the economy and the earth at the same time. He uses a variety of personal stories, events in history, and scientific facts to portray that the world, especially America, is in need of a new green-revolution, and he uses scientific analysis to demonstrate how many of the world’s problems are interconnected with one another, such as how America’s addiction to oil pollutes the air by emitting greenhouse gases, worsens the economy by paying for imports, and, surprisingly strengthens organizations like Al-Qaeda due to their countries being main oil suppliers. Friedman sheds light about the true effects humans have on the environment, and takes a deep look into the ever controversial subject of global warming, or better defined as global climatic disruption.

This was perhaps the most well thought of, elaborate, and mind boggling piece of informative, environment related literature that I have ever read ever. I warn to those who are weak readers, or just don’t care that this is no ordinary book; it is likely to change the perception of the world’s problems of anyone that chooses to read it.To me, the writing of the book seemed biased in some areas, but objective in others, although it all portrayed the same message in a clear and understandable way. This was unlike any other green related article I have ever read and or blogged about; the near excessive amount of information in some sections of the book were almost mind-numbing, while other areas were fairly simple to understand, and Friedman’s usage of stories, both personal and not, helps give a real person point of view to the book. Before reading this, I would never have thought that so many of the world’s global issues were so interconnected, nor would I have thought that green technology could be used to enhance America’s military. Some people think that global warming is not a scientific crisis, but rather a political issue fought by Democrats and Republicans. Some people believe that fossil fuels and oil will remain abundant for years to come. There are even those who believe that “going green” will only worsen the country’s already bad economy, and that the whole idea is mere politics and not real science. The fact that this book exists proves false all the accusations made by nonbelievers; its real, and like it or not, people need to do something about it and get out of the lazy, wasteful lifestyle that too many people have grown accustomed to. There is hope though, because just as Thomas Friedman has said:

“But if we rise to this challenge, and truly become the Re-Generation– redefining green and rediscovering, reviving, and regenerating America– we, and the world, will not only survive but thrive in an age that is hot, flat, and crowded.” (Page 474)

The following is a response to the article “Showing the Benefits of ‘Green’ Retrofitting” by Julie Satow, which originally appeared in the New York Times Opinion Section. The article begins by explaining how retrofitting has been around for quite some time, and although it’s proven to be beneficial both economically and environmentally, there seems to be a lack of data supporting the practice. This is why the Deutsche Bank Americas Foundation is funding a project to create a public database for all retrofitted buildings in New York. According to Gary Hattem, president of the Deutsche Bank Americas Foundation, data is one of the key aspects that building owners typically look at when trying to improve their buildings, and it’s the lack of data towards retrofitting that is keeping the practice from going mainstream. Developers also agree that the lack of a database is the main obstacle in spreading green technology throughout the country, but they are also confident that this new database will ,hopefully, remove this obstacle.

This is really good news to hear. Knowing that progress is being made to make buildings and businesses of all kinds greener through retrofitting makes me hopeful that America is finally getting on the right track. Although I personally did not connect as much to the article, due to the fact that I do not work at a business nor do I live in a retrofitted home, there are hundreds of other people that it does connect to, which is why it’s important to keep in mind, especially for those who haven’t read the article. Technology such as this has the capability of being expanded to homes and large businesses, which relates to just about every home-owner and business worker there is. The writing of this article sound optimistic towards a big project, which is not something that’s seen too often these days. I also liked how the article was easy to read, and introduced the possibilities of savings in energy, money, and job number increase, which are three of America’s largest problems aside from environmental issues. I think it’s truly a great idea to have a public database promoting the benefits of green technology, and I hope to hear more about the success of this project in the future.

The following is a response to the article “Why Bother?” by Michael Pollan, which originally appeared in the New York Times Opinion Section. Pollan starts his article by asking the question “why bother?” The question is in regards to human behavior towards being environmentally friendly, such as using different light-bulbs and driving less. The article explains how difficult it is to bother with being environmentally friendly when millions of human beings unconsciously commit acts that are against mother earth. Even the most unlikely of actions can cause damage to the environment, such as using a clothes dryer, and eating meat from supermarkets. It goes on to say that the root of the problem, as well as the solution lies mostly on human behavior; however, according to Michael Specter, a writer of a New Yorker piece on carbon footprints, changing human behavior is not enough to put the planet back on the right track. It will also take laws and money to solve the problem. Pollan then explains how “theoretically” a viral social change could sweep the nation into going green; granted that there were those to set an example, and how breaking away from technology and bothering to create a community garden could help not only with the environment, but also with keeping people healthy and in shape.

Why bother? That is such a good question that people need to consider. I for one did bother to read this article, and found hundreds of connections to my life. I am guilty of using cars, using computers in which I was able to write this blog, and even eating ever-so-delicious meat. This doesn’t make me a bad person, but it certainly made me think about the way I run my life, as well as the way everyone else runs their lives. It was these subtle connections to the article that I found both interesting and some-what disturbing. The format that the article was written in was very simple and easy to read. The article was written in a way that related to just about every person in one way or another. It read like it was written by a person who actually cared and knew about what he was writing. I enjoyed how Pollan was able to clearly state the main causes of the problem, and suggest some reasonable solutions to the problem from a stand point that any person could accomplish if they were to set their mind to it. I thought that the suggestion of creating a community garden was a good idea; it would be free, and the exercise from gardening would help prevent obesity and promote healthy living. Overall, this was a very well written article and I encourage those who have not read it to do so.